Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

John Locke

No description
by

Daniela Cárdenas

on 13 October 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of John Locke

John Locke

Criticisms

John Locke
Rejected the rationalist ideas of knowledge, claiming that before we could speak about the world on the basis of our experiences we have to leave aside the ideas of rationalism
Innate knowledge
He said that when we are born our mind is a clean slate or "tabula rasa".All knowledge is gained through experience (senses and reflection).
Criticism
Both Leibniz and modern philosopher Peter Carruthers counter-argumented this.
Locke theory of knowledge
Three kinds of knowledge: intuitive, demonstrative, and sensitive
All are based in ideas
Problem ?
Since ideas are most of the
time inferred from the other people how can we expect them to KNOW what we really mean.? How do we know that the other person is thinking the same.?
Main Counter-Arguments
Several counterarguments have been raised against Locke’s theory, the first of which refers to the development of theoretical ideas like math and science. Critics claim that according to Locke’s theory, a person can’t have a conception of things (like numbers, for example) without first having a direct perception of them.
Introspection
Leibniz claimed that the concept of “something is learned” therefore “it is not innate”is invalid.

To lean something does not stop it from being innate. Instead, what we learn has already been in our minds potentiality.

He said that the mind monad cannot get ideas from the senses, "it has no windows." Therefore ideas must be innate.
Criticism
That knowledge is innate in the sense of being innately determined to make its appearance at some stage in childhood.
Evolution has allowed us to know certain things at particular stages of our lives as part of our natural development.
Peter Carruther's defends rationalism by saying:
Locke defines knowledge as the perception of the agreement or disagreement between "ideas"
Four ways are identity or diversity, relation, coexistence or necessary connexion, and real existence
Ideas..
Ideas are the objects of the mind with which we think and by which we know.

Some ideas are expressible by words and some are not
What if what "we" learn has been in our minds all along??
We can't be born without knowing anything...
Problem
Locke’s main defense against this argument is that experience not only includes external sense perception, but it also encompasses introspection and reflection on these perceptions
Locke’s inclusion of internal experience, or reflection, is both effective and necessary. It accounts for various theoretical and abstract ideas that could obviously not have been developed through sense perception alone.
This type of internal experience is what allows us to develop more abstract ideas. According to Locke, "complex ideas can be always be traced back to experience."
Bibliography
Truncellito, David A.. " Epistemology." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2013. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/epistemo/#H1>.
“John Locke.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Web. 8 Oct. 2013. < http://www.iep.utm.edu/locke/>.
Steup , Mathias. "Epistemology." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., 14 Dec. 2005. Web. 8 Oct. 2013. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology>
Full transcript